Tucker’s Perilous Platforming of Iran’s Murderous Regime

Interviewing Iran’s President Sanitizes a Regime That Fuels Terror and Distorts Truth

Created with ChapGPT

A Reckless Interview

Tucker Carlson’s decision to interview Iran’s President Masoud Pezeshkian represents a profound failure of journalistic judgment. Pezeshkian operates as a figurehead under Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, whose openly calls Jews a “cancer” and denies the Holocaust occurred. Iran’s government systematically funds terrorist organizations like Hezbollah and Hamas, spreading deadly violence and instability throughout the Middle East. When Carlson presents Pezeshkian as a legitimate voice deserving of airtime, he risks normalizing a regime that routinely imprisons, tortures, and executes its citizens for dissent. This approach abandons the core mission of journalism—seeking and exposing truth—in favor of providing a platform that amplifies oppression under the false banner of balanced dialogue.

False Moral Equivalency

Carlson’s grave error becomes even more pronounced when he offers an interview to Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, framing this as an attempt to balance two sides of a complex story. This creates a dangerous false moral equivalency between a democratically elected leader and representatives of a regime that sponsors international terrorism. Consider how history would judge a journalist during World War II who interviewed Benito Mussolini and then sought out Winston Churchill to “balance” the narrative. Such an approach would have equated fascist tyranny with democratic resistance, distorting reality and undermining the moral clarity necessary to confront authoritarianism. Carlson’s framework does precisely this, treating oppression and freedom as equivalent positions in a debate.

“The Zionist regime is a cancerous tumor that must be removed and, God willing, it will be.”

— Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of Iran

A Pattern of Misjudgment

Carlson’s 2024 interview with Vladimir Putin reveals a troubling pattern in his approach to authoritarian leaders. Putin, who systematically jails journalists and wages wars that have killed thousands of innocent people (on both sides), received a platform to spread propaganda largely unchallenged. While this interview serves as context rather than the primary focus, it demonstrates Carlson’s consistent tendency to engage autocrats without providing sufficient scrutiny. His approach risks legitimizing figures who actively suppress truth and present them as equal participants in global discourse, which fundamentally muddles public understanding of these regimes’ actions and motivations.

Historical Lessons Ignored

No credible Western journalist interviewed Adolf Hitler during World War II, and there are important reasons for this precedent. Reporters at that time exposed Nazi horrors through rigorous investigative work and firsthand observation, not through providing platforms for propaganda—Carlson’s engagement with Pezeshkian veers dangerously close to propaganda rather than legitimate journalism. By treating Iran’s leadership as worthy participants in civilized political debate, he sanitizes a regime built fundamentally on lies, violence, and the systematic oppression of its people, betraying the essential principles of a free press that should expose rather than enable tyranny.

The Cost of Normalization

Carlson’s actions significantly shape public perceptions, and his platform reaches millions of viewers who trust his judgment. When he legitimizes Iran’s leadership while creating false equivalencies with democratic figures, he desensitizes audiences to the regime’s documented brutality and human rights violations. Actual journalism demands challenging power structures and exposing corruption, not amplifying authoritarian voices for sensational access. As Iran continues to fund international terrorism and systematically silence its people, responsible media outlets must prioritize truth over ratings. Rejecting such interviews remains essential to upholding the integrity of a free press and protecting the public from deliberately distorted narratives.

Carlson has a lot of worthwhile things to say, based on having followed his career. But this kind of extremely poor judgement diminishes his credibility on every else he does. Too bad.

---

Here is a link to a short 2.5 minute video from Carlson where he walks you through his justification for doing the interview. And of course you can go the Tucker Carlson Network if you want to see the whole interview (no way I’m doing that) — but you’ll need to pop some money to subscribe ($9 for a month).

Oh, and here is a 3 minute video that demonstrates how the political structure in Iran means that the “elected” President is really the bitch of the Supreme Leader.